Skip to main content

tv   FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace  FOX News  September 26, 2010 6:00pm-7:00pm EDT

6:00 pm
gold skyrocketed. it protects users from devalue >> chris: i'm chris wallace and this is fox news sun. -- sunday. house republicans make a pledge to america. telling what they'll do if they win back control in november. will the plan help the country, will it help the g.o.p.? we'll ask house republican leader john boehner, and, kevin mccarthy, the document's lead author. then, house democrats push back. we'll get reaction from majority leader steny hoyer. only on fox news sunday. also, while president obama talks at the u.n., a new book details bitter struggles inside the war cabinet. we'll ask our sunday panel about
6:01 pm
the president's foreign policy and our power player of the week. a political whiz kid runs the biggest show in town. all, right now, on fox news sunday. >> chris: and hello, again from fox news in washington. house republicans unveiled this 45-page document thursday, that lays out their legislature agenda. the plan calls for smaller and more limited government, repeal of president obama's health care reform. and, cuts in federal spending, and extending bush era tax cuts to help create jobs. joining us exclusively today to discuss their plan, house republican leader john boehner. and, congressman kevin mccarthy, who was the driving force behind the pledge and, gentlemen, welcome back to fox news sunday. president obama says your plan is nothing more than what he calls the worn-out philosophy of president bush, the exafact is go back to the bush budget and extend the tax cuts, congressman
6:02 pm
boehner, how does the document show the g.o.p. has changed since the last election. >> i think it is pretty clear if you look at what is going on here in washington with all the spending, all the debt, all the government takeovers and controls, what the document says, is that we reject that, we want a smaller, less costly and more accountable government and go through and lay out specifics, whether it is the spending, whether getting jobs going and -- again, in america and whether it is health care, national and border security, and, the issue of reforming the way congress does its business. >> chris: we'll get into specifics in a moment, but congressman mccarthy, a number of conservatives aren't buying this. let's look at what eric erickson of the conservative web site red state had to say about the document. he said, it is full of nontested, kid approved pablum and will do nothing but make washington fatter before we
6:03 pm
crash from the sugar high. >> "the national review" says it is bolder than the contract of 1994. "wall street journal," says it will do more to shrink the federal government. just like when the contract came out, it will be attacked from both sides but remember, it's not a party platform. this is specific legislation that can be taken up right now before we depart that will shrink government, take away the uncertainty, the number one reason out there why jobs are not being created, uncertainty. they don't know what will happen with the taxes and what will happen from regulation, and, this could rein it all in and washington is spending more time with comedians than debating the future, the economic future. >> chris: congressman boehner. let's get specific. why there is no mention of ending earmarks in the document. >> this is a document about now. this is an agenda that could be nkt enacted today if the speaker of the house would call it up for a vote and today we have a moratorium on earmark and i can tell you, that if republicans win the majority?
6:04 pm
november it will not be business as usual here in congress. and -- >> let me ask you about that. >> moratorium -- >> a one year moratorium. >> and why wouldn't the democrats, this year, join us? >> chris: okay. >> in a one more moratorium. >> chris: a one year moratorium that ends in march and a number of top leaders including jerry lewis and likely the chairman of the house appropriations committee, wants earmarks back, and are you willing to pledge now, if you take over the house, the republicans do, earmarks will be gone forever? >> it will not be business as usual in washington, d.c. >> chris: that is not answering my question, sir. >> it will not be. listen, you know me. i never asked for an earmark in the 20 years i have been in congress. >> chris: but a lot of your colleagues have. >> i understand it will not be business as usual. >> chris: congressman mccarthy, let's drill down in to the spending cuts that you propose in the document. you talked about cutting nondefense discretionary spending, which is only 16% of
6:05 pm
the federal budget. and you talk about cutting $100 billion from that pot next year which would amount to a 22% cut, in those programs. you say you want to cut across the board and according to the white house it means 200,000 kids would be kept out of head start, the fbi would cut 2700 agents, and,' government would detain thousands fewer illegal immigrants. >> look, for a guy that started on the head start board of my county for ten years i know that is not true. i'm saying it is discretionary spending and look at what happened across america the last three years, every household had to cut back and what is discretionary spending, it is in criticized 88 cents and we say find 8 cents out of every dollar and you know what we spend money on, for instance when you go into transportation, there is an increase, every person that buys a first class ticket on amtrak for the sleeper car, we subsidize that by $364. that is $1.2 billion saved. if we decide the american public
6:06 pm
shouldn't borrow 40 cents out of every dollar to subsidize that. >> chris: that is one billion dollars, how do you get the other 99 billion? the fact is, you a are going to do nondefense discretionary spending it is a 22% cut to cut $100 billion. >> we have grown 88% over the last three years, it's not that difficult -- >> why is there not any specific cuts here. >> it goes specifically down to -- we give -- >> no in this, it doesn't. >> general electric we give the ability from department to department, where we show progress and the cuts and we have gone more, than the ability to go through it and one after the other. what about when we laid out or pledge to that lumber company, no one has had a raise in two years. but, even congress when you look at the legislative branch, not the individuals, but the legislature branch, increased 5%. we're saying you go through, go back to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout numbers, and we can live on that, and actually find
6:07 pm
further. >> chris: as willy sutton said about banks, entitlements are where the money is, more than 40% of the budget and yet, i have looked through fledge and there is not one single proposal to cut social security, medicare, medicaid. >> chris we make it clear in there, we will lay out a plan to get -- work toward a balanced budget and to deal with the entitlement crisis. it is time for us as americans to have an adult conversation with each other, about the serious challenges our country faces. and be can't have that serious conversation until we lay out the size of the problem. once americans understand how big the problem is, nobody can begin to talk about potential solution, but i am committed to having that adult conversation with the american people, because it is important for the future of our kids and grandkids. >> forgive my sir, isn't the right time to have the adult conversation now, when you have the document? why not make a single proposal,
6:08 pm
to cut social security, medicare and medicaid. >> chris, this is what happens here in washington. when you start down the path, you just invite all kinds of problems. i know, i have been there. i think we need to do this in a more systematic way and have the conversation first. let's not get to the potential solution, let's make sure americans understand how big the problem is. then we can begin to talk about possible solutions, and, then, work ourselves into those solutions that are doable. >> chris: congressman mccarthy, nancy pelosi says the house may or may not vote this week before they go on adjournment on taxes, i know that is one of your big issues. >> i think she's afraid. she has 37 democrats in her own party they say they want to ex-extend. they agree with republicans and the principle you should not raise taxes in a recession and you could lose 1.2 million jobs. and the democrats failed to lead on this and will want to lead the house without dealing with
6:09 pm
it and that is uncertainty itself. that is keeping capital on the sidelines, and stopping jobs from being created in america. >> chris, the american people are asking the question, where are the jobs. and if we leave here this week and adjourn for the election without preventing these tax increases on the american people, it will be this most irresponsible thing that i have seen since i have been in washington, d.c., and i have been here a while. the speaker ought to promise a fair and open debate on making sure that we extend all of the current tax rates, and the uncertainty and getting our economy going again. i accept, it sounds like they are going to pump the -- punt the ball until a lame duck session and as a result, allow the uncertainty to continue, the economy to grow slow and no jobs being created. >> julie: congressman boehner, if there is a vote this week, you say you want a vote and if the choice is just whether or not to extend the middle class tax cuts, how will you vote? >> i have made it clear i am for extending all of the current tax
6:10 pm
rates. we will not -- end the uncertainty and get or economy going again and create jobs in america, we have to eliminate all of this. i also say, the speaker ought to have a fair and open debate and if she's not willing to have a fair and open debate she should not count on our votes. >> she took the pledge, to have an open debate and you would have all options and greater choice and we have the country moving in the right direction. >> chris: i want to press again with you congressman boehner. and you understand why, a tickle issue. if they bring up a vote, extend the tax cuts for this middle class or not, do you vote yea or nay. >> i want a fair and open debate to extend all the current tax rates and if the speaker will offer and allow a fair and open debate, i am confident that there is a bipartisan majority in the congress today to extend all of the current tax rates. >> chris: what is wrong, congressman boehner with the idea, as it seems will happen because the senate said they will not do this, of coming back with a lame duck session, after the election? >> the american people are asking where are the jobs.
6:11 pm
we don't have jobs because of all of the uncertainty coming out of the administration, and this congress. the congress has an opportunity this week, to end some of the uncertainties, by allowing the american people to know what the tax rates are going to be at the end of the year. and, to adjourn without dealing with this, means that in their minds the elections are more important than the jobs for the american people. and it is just politics as usual. >> it costs us $7 billion more because they want to wait and how many more jobs will it cost, to continue the uncertainty and how can someone plan to make the investment to create a new job if they don't know what the tax system will be. >> chris there is time to bring a comedian to washington, d.c. but they don't have time to eliminate the uncertainty by extending all of the current tax rates, i think that is irresponsible. >> chris: congressman boehner, will the g.o.p. win back the house in november or as some republicans are now suggesting, have you peaked too early. >> our goal is to earn back the
6:12 pm
mantle yojority and drive for a costly and more accountable government here in washington, d.c. it's an uphill climb but it is possible and we are working to do that. >> chris: you realize that the political... we are going to say, if you don't win the house it is a defeat if you pick up 30 seats. >> i understand there are expectations set and there are more than 100 races going on in america that are in play, in a normal year there are 20 or 30 races and all but two are held by incumbent democrats in the country, if you become the next speaker some republicans ante partiers say you are too old school and that you, john boehner, will not shake up washington. >> listen, i come from a family of 12 and my dad owned a tavern and i have two brothers laid off in the recession and two brothers in law and i know what is going on in america and i have the support of my
6:13 pm
colleagues, current and future. >> chris: what would you do? shake up washington? i understand this. but, what are we to believe about speaker boehner? how would you run things. >> i have watched speakers for 20 years and i have seen the good and bad parts and i think it is time for a real fair and open process in the congress and today you have a handful of people who decide the outcome of almost any bill even though 435 of us serve in the house, each of us representing roughly 650,000 people, i think every member ought to have the opportunity to represent his constituents, both democrats and republicans, and that means a fair and open process in the house, unlike anything that i have seen in the 20 years i have been here. >> chris: would you, i know we are getting ahead here but the voters need -- i think probably want to know how you'd run things and what kind of a house it would be, with speaker boehner. would you see your role as speaker as blocking the obama agenda or looking for areas of compromise? >> i think the american people
6:14 pm
want us to find a way to work together, to address the concerns that face the american people every day. at the end of the day it's not about democrats republicans, or politics it is about meeting the needs of the american people who sent us here to do their bidding. >> chris: and, can you give me areas, i mean, obviously you have your agenda and would like them to adopt it. they are clearly not. you have the possibility of gridlock and could you see areas of possible compromise between a president at one end of pennsylvania avenue and speaker boehner at the other end. >> i think with the document we make pretty clear where we are going and we are going to try tor a smaller, less cost laned more accountable government here in washington, d.c. and to the stents we can find common ground in that direction i would welcome it. >> chris: congressman boehner, congressman mccarthy, thanks for coming in and answering our questions, steny hoyer responds to the g.o.p. plan and we'll ask
6:15 pm
him what defendants wimocrats wt the bush tax cuts that are about to expire. with these priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service, if it fits, it ships anywhere in te country for a low flat rate. no weigh? nope. no way. yeah. no weigh? sure. no way! uh-uh. no way. yes way, no weigh. priority mail flat rate box shipping starts at $4.95, only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship.
6:16 pm
6:17 pm
6:18 pm
>> chris: joining us now is house democratic leader steny hoyer, congressman, welcome back to fox news sunday. >> good to be with you, chris, thanks a lot, while republicans have their pledge and we'll get into that, democrats have the record over the last two years controlling both the white house and both house of congress. let's look at that: the federal deficit this year will be $1.3 trillion. since president obama took office, 3.2 million americans lost their jobs. and, despite democrats adding almost $3 trillion to the national debt the last two years, gdp growth is just 1.6%. congre
6:19 pm
congress manag congressman, that is your record. >> we inherited four quarters of declining growth, and including the first quarter of '09, which i think is correct to attribute to the bush administration and we brought it out and we are gaining jobs, almost 700,000 jobs this year alone. clearly, the deficit is a terrific problem that we have got to face. why did we have the deficit? the 90% of it comes directly from the economic recession, and the bush policies that were not paid for... >> chris: unemployment went up since you guys came into office by 3 million people and unemployment is 9.6%. >> we lost 3.8 million the year before we got into office and we were in a deep hole. and, in fact, of course, jobs went -- unemployment went up 83% under the bush administration. and, has gone up 26%, under the obama administration. so, yes, but we have gone into positive -- >> tell that to the 15 million
6:20 pm
people out of work, sir. >> and we have been passing bill after bill and passed one this last week to expand small businesses to give small businesses a tax cut, $30 billion on the table, which will be leveraged into $300 billion to grow jobs, to expand jobs, and, we have passed the tax bill through the house, which said we will not outsource jobs that unfortunately every republican voted against. >> chris: all right, briefly, here's the pledge to america. give you a minute-and-a-half, what's wrong with it. >> the pledge to america is more spin than specifics and the pledge to america, i cannot really say anything as harsh about the pledge for america, which is really no pledge at all, than the republican opponents have said, the conservatives said, tea party members have said and as a matter of fact the club for growth said it was milquetoast and the people who wrote it were not prepared to lead. >> chris: they don't want to go in your direction, they want to go further in the other direction. >> but we are pursuing a program
6:21 pm
which is getting our country back to work, creating manufacturing jobs, where we lost manufacturing jobs under the bush administration, and has a plan to get the budget under control. readopt paygo and the reason we got into a deep hole, the republicans passed programs and didn't pay for them and the document, they do not want to pay for them, either, in fact in the document, they want to create another $4 trillion in debt, and say the way they'll solve the deficit problem is to cut nondefense, nonsecurity discretionary spending. they'd have to cut between 2/3 and 80% of all discretionary spending, over the next ten years, our country would -- >> more like 22% -- >> i don't think so. >> chris: for the 100 billion the first year. let's move on to another issue. taxes. simple question: will the house hold a vote before you adjourn for a month of campaigning this week, a vote, this week, on whether or not to extend the bush tax cuts.
6:22 pm
>> i definitely will and let me tell you why. the senate refused to move forward on that issue, as you know, we have 400 bills spending in the senate, 75% of which have gotten 50 republican votes or more but they cannot move through the senate. so, it would be a specious act. but, democrats have absolutely pledged and will make sure before the end of the year, the republicans increase in middle income taxes will not go into effect. the republican bill that phased out this year -- >> wait, you are calling this -- calling the bush tax cuts an increase in taxes on the middle class? >> the budget ended in 2010, that is why we have this confronting us, why? because they played budget games for scoring purposes and, yes, it is the republican plan to eliminate those -- >> but you have a big majority. why not pass the extension of the middle class tax cuts before going home to campaign for a month. >> i told you, the senate -- >> you are in the house.
6:23 pm
>> it would be a specious act for us, and what is not a specious act, chris is we have absolutely guaranteed that there will be no increase in middle income taxes and the president said that and speaker and i have said that, harry reid and dick durbin said that there will be no increase in middle income taxes. >> chris: here's the point, congressman. the democrats held a big majority in both the house and the senate for almost two years now. since january of 2009. almost two years. isn't it a serious failure by democrats in both the house and the senate that you haven't told the american people what is going to happen to their taxes on income, on dividends, on capital gains, on inheritance, and, is coming up three months away, is that any way to add certainty and confidence to the economy, during tough times. >> it's not and that is largely due to the obstructionism in the u.s. senate by the republicans who have just enough to stop -- >> you have a simple majority, and have had it more than a year
6:24 pm
and the fact is the democrats in the senate, i'll ask you to defend the senate, they haven't even written the bill, you haven't written a bill in the house. >> hold it. we passed the capital gains bill more than a year ago. >> chris: i'm talking about extending the bush tax cuts. >> i understand they are part of the bush tax cuts, we are extending the capital gains tax -- excuse me, estate tax, at what it had been. it is unfortunate we were not able to get it through the senate, and weren't able to get it through the senate because, the republicans -- republican obstructionism and they want to eliminate the capital gains because they are focused on the 1 or 2% of the richest people in america. this is wt we have been confronted with on taxes and they want to raise -- cut taxes on the wealthiest in america, and we want to make sure that middle income america, working americans, don't have a tax increase, and, the obstructionism in the senate, has not allowed us to move forward. it is unfortunate. >> chris: if you -- if your party loses control of the
6:25 pm
house, will you promise not to hold the lame duck session after the congress. >> we of course are not going to promise that, chris. that would be an irrational promise to make because we are not going to complete the appropriations process, again because of the difficulty of the obstructionism in the united states senate... >> chris: you could have passed all of these things, but -- >> certainly could have. >> chris: here's the question -- >> come back to america sure, as frankly republicans did when they were in charge. >> chris: is it right to have members of congress who have just lost, i'm talking about a scenario, where the house goes to republicans, members of congress who lost come back and decide taxes and spending against the will of the americans who just voted. >> i don't think we will make any decisions against the will of the american people. frankly, chris, that is your assumption -- >> no, i'm setting up a scenario. >> it is absolutely correct and under both parties' leadership we have done that, members of congress are leck ford 24
6:26 pm
months. not 21 months, not 22, 24 months. and they will continue their responsibility to the end of the term. >> chris: even if, let's say, i'm just -- suppose, even if republicans gain control of the house and one of the clear messages is, we don't want to raise taxes on anyone, it is okay for the democrats to come back in a lame duck session and vote to let the tax cuts for the wealthy lapse. >> i certainly think it is objections. they'll make a policy judgments. as a matter of fact, chris, there is no confusion where the democrats stand on this issue. the president made it very clear and i have made it clear, the leadership made it clear, we are for making sure that the middle class americans do not get a tax increase, and we'll make sure that happens. we have also made it clear that cutting taxes on the wealthiest in america will simply exacerbate the deficit, without any assistance to the economy. >> chris: less than two minutes left and i want to ask you two questions, if i may, sir.
6:27 pm
when nancy pelosi became speaker she promised to drain the swamp oe of ethics abuses in the house, charlie rangel and maxine waters are charged with breaking house rules and both demanded trials before the election. question, sir: will the ethics committee hold those trials before the election or not. >> that is up to jo bonner, the republican and lofgren, the democrat. >> chris: so far they haven't scheduled that. >> because of their own scheduling problems but let me say this, charlie -- >> i'm chris. charlie rangel. >> chris, let me say this: the fact of the matter is, the ethics process is working. the fact of the matter is unlike under republicans we haven't fired the chairman of the ethics committee, because they went after somebody in the democratic party and we haven't removed any members from the ethics committee. the ethics process is working. >> chris: but you are not committing that they will have the trials they have sought, but, more voters have to vote on
6:28 pm
waters and rangel in november. >> i think that needs to be resolved, as quickly as possible. obviously, the members thoeftics committee will have to make the der nation, and they have their own issues, to deal with in their own elections. >> chris: finally, 30 seconds left on friday, comedian steven colbert testified before a crai congressional committee in his fake, comedic character, at a time when the country faces these problems, was it an embarrassment for the house. >> no, it was not appropriate and an embarrassment for more colbert more than the house. >> chris: he was called by the democratic chair of the committee senate you asked me, chris whether the testimony was appropriate and i think it was not appropriate. >> chris: he should not have been called. >> i don't know about whether he was called but what he had to say, i think was not the way it should have been said. did he have a position on the issues, he should have given the issues and i think, that is my personal opinion. >> chris: you regret it?
6:29 pm
>> i think it was inappropriate. can i say something, going back to the pledge, because, the -- >> 20 seconds. >> the american public, heard from the young guns and it turned out to be a pop gun and turned out out to be spin, not substance an specifics and turned out to be a return to the failed bush policies of which a demonstrably -- got us into a deep hole and the american people has two economic premises, one we pursued which gave us the best economy we have seen in yours and my lifetime in the '9 oth0s or the worst econoe have seen in the 2000s. >> chris: congressman, thanks for coming in, with 37 days coming up to the election, it will be quite a rush to the finish. >> it is, thanks, chris. >> chris: the united nations, talk of war in a new book, our sunday panel tackles that when we come right back. s it will bea s it will bea rush to thehost: could switchio really save you 15% or more on car insurance?
6:30 pm
is a bird in the hand worth 2 in the bush? appraiser: well you rarely see them in this good of shape. appraiser: for example the fingers are perfect. appraiser: the bird is in mint condition. appraiser: and i would say if this were to go to auction today, appraiser: conservatively it would be worth 2 in the bush. woman: really? appraiser: it's just beautiful, thank you so much for bringing it in. woman: unbelievable anncr: geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more. you're one of the 50 million americans with frequent heartburn. did you know, with prilosec otc, you can stop frequent heartburn before it starts? heartburn happens when stomach acid refluxes, or backs up into the esophagus. this causes the burning sensation in your chest, known as heartburn. with just one pill a day, prilosec otc treats frequent heartburn for 24 hours, providing all-day and all-night protection. here's how it works -- prilosec otc's unique delayed-release system protects the medicine as it passes through the stomach's tough acid.
6:31 pm
the medicine then gets absorbed into the body, turning off many acid-producing pumps at the source, so less acid is produced. with just one pill a day, you get 24-hour heartburn protection all day and all night, satisfaction guaranteed. trust the number-one doctor-, gastroenterologist-, and pharmacist-recommended brand to treat your frequent heartburn. to request a free sample, visit prilosecotc.com. prilosec otc. heartburn gone. power on.
6:32 pm
6:33 pm
>> the door remains open to diplomacy, should iran shoes to walk through. >> it was offensive. it was hateful. for him to make a statement like that, was inexcusable. >> chris: president obama at the u.n., reaching out once again to iran, but, then, having to react to president mahmoud ahmadinejad's suggestion that our government was behind 9/11. and it's time for our sunday group. brit hume, fox news senior political analyst, and mara liasson of national public radio, juan williams from national public radio and bill kristol from the weekly standard. the state department called mahmoud ahmadinejad delusional and the president called his remarks hateful and yet, the president still talks about diplomacy. why is it that mr. obama refuses
6:34 pm
to take no for an answer from the iranians? >> it is a little hard to imagine at this stage that he has not gotten the message, it is really kind of sad, and, worrisome that he cannot see that this guy is a crude little thug, there is no point in having a negotiation with, because you probably cannot trust anything he says or agrees to. he's a totally mercurial and changes from one day to the next on the things he says and tends towards saying out ranges and, yes indeed, even delusional things. and there is no indication that this mullahs who run the country behind the scenes are dissatisfied with him and would rather have some other spokesman out there, none whatever. the public may be dissatisfied with him but the president did nothing to encourage that, in my view he continues almost to legitimize the guy and it is a very foolish behavior on the president's part. >> chris: mara. >> i don't think legitimatizing him, saying the
6:35 pm
door is open does not, is not the same as saying we'll drop the sanctions right away and start talking to you. he's not doing that. it is almost like a diplomatic nicety, eventually, if you ever wanted to change your stand on this we'll talk to you and in the meantime, sanctions are going forward and i don't know how much they'll accomplish but he has not dropped that. and i think that the fact that so many diplomats walked out as they should have, when mahmoud ahmadinejad displayed this crack pots conspiracy theories about 9/11 was correct and i don't see a change in the administration's policy towards iran. >> chris: u.s. officials think maybe the latest round of sanctions is beginning to work and affect iran and its economy and perhaps the iranians may be willing to negotiate about their nuclear program. do you see any sign of that? >> no, i wouldn't be surprised if the iranian regime does a phony face towards negotiation to try and buy it more time. that is what they are buying,
6:36 pm
buying time for the nuclear program to go ahead and it has been going ahead and the reason the president doesn't want to talk about the real implications of having a delusional and hateful iranian regime in power is the real implication is if sanctions fail we have to use force and i'm not certain the president doesn't know that. i am open to the notion that he will end up a year from now using force against iran and he feels there is no point in talking about that now and the more you put force on the table the more you might encourage those, who say, wait we are heading towards the precipice and that is not his style and keeps the door open for negotiations but look at the way it is playing out and is playing out towards the use of force against iran, i think. >> chris: juan. >> mahmoud ahmadinejad's statement at the united nations is evidence of the trouble he is having at home. i think the mullahs, ayatollahs are much more conservative than highs and that is hard to imagine from our perceive as americans but in fact he is trying to play populist politics at home and the sanction have had an effect already and i
6:37 pm
think the economic performance in iran is troubling to the country's middle class, and the heart and soul of opposition to the tyrannical government that is there so i think there is trouble in iran and the statements feed that and he plays populist pop politics and go to indonesia and jordan they believe the u.s. has some role in 9/11 and he's playing to the emotion to somehow make himself a hero to those people and if you also, brit, take into account the british said they were about to celebrate the idea that the iranians were returning to the table, i think it gives you a suggestion that much of the world was hoping for that, it wasn't just president obama. >> chris: president obama on another subject shifted the focus of his foreign policy in the speech at the u.n. talking more about the importance of human rights an democrad democr for all the world sounding more
6:38 pm
like president bush. >> president barack obama: part of the price of our freedom is standing up for the freedom of others. that belief will guide america's leadership in this 21st century. >> chris: brit, do you think that is rhetoric or do you see a mid course correction and the president talking as president george w. bush did, more about pursuing a democracy agenda. >> freedom agenda, as president bush called it. well, it is something to be hoped for but i'm not sure yet we have seen an example of that, one way to stand up for freedom would be when people are seeking to be free, as in iran, to cite a conspicuous example, there is a straight calling for it and, he says virtually nothing as the regime moves in on him. he's got tests to pass before anybody can seriously say this man is now adopted a freedom of democracy agenda, i wonder in fact why the president in
6:39 pm
response to mahmoud ahmadinejad anyplace else comments about the possibility with an inside job at 9/11 didn't say, we're note ones who slaughter our own people in the streets, it is your regime, sir, you -- >> there is an opening. >> chris: but they don't take our advice! legendary reporter bob woodward has a new book "obama's wars" in which he quotes the president as saying this: we can absorb a terrorist attack and he says, mr. obama was pressing for an exit strategy at the same time that he was deciding to send 30,000 more u.s. men and women to afghanistan. what do you make of what seems to be in this book and i don't know you if read it. i have only seen the accounts of it, the president's apparently ambivalence. >> there is no doubt he had ambivalence, about afghanistan and didn't want to be there forever and stuck in a quagmire but when we lent up through the
6:40 pm
long process and comes off as thoughtful and serious in the book that he agreed that a surge was required. he wanted to know that it wouldn't go on indefinitely. now, how long it goes on remains to be seen, general petraeus in the book is quoted as saying that he believes we will be there for a long time and and i think he says for the rest of our lives and probably our kids' lives. that might end up being what it is. not the numbers that are in afghanistan now but some kind of a korea situation and i don't think the president closed that off, but, yet, all of his ambivalence which i think is true, is reflected there. >> chris: 30 seconds in the segment, bill. your thoughts? >> i don't think it is ambivalence, it is tough choices, and, when you are fighting a war, you should fight the war full out, and too, chief your goals, you shouldn't hamper your military by not giving them the full number of troops requested and by putting them on a deadline for july, 2011 which hurts and having said that, i think the war in afghanistan, is
6:41 pm
capable in afghanistan and the president decides, he's the president of the u.s., commander-in-chief and we should win the war. >> chris: we have to take a break here. up next the g.o.p.'s pledge to america. good policy? good politics? our panel weighs in. nable and he the president decides we should the president decides we should win i'm coming to take over the world, of lick racing, srting with you, dsrl. stufy, make the call.
6:42 pm
♪ [ dialing ] [ beeping ] [ beeping ] [ beeping ] [ eli ] it's go time. ♪ ♪
6:43 pm
6:44 pm
>> this president and this congress has put this nation on the road to bankruptcy and are pressing down on the the accelerator. it is time to press on the brake and put us back on the road to recovery and opportunity. >> chris: texas republican congressman jeb hensarling,
6:45 pm
talking about the g.o.p.'s new pledge to america and we are back with the panel, house republicans came out this week and i have it, the slick, 45-page document, pledge to america and there's a lot of disagreement even among conservatives about how constructive it is. what do you make of it. >> i remember bill kristol, and i think brit was in on this, too, saying we have to take seriously this nation's debt and we have to add substance to the fact republicans are popular but able to say no to president obama, but, what do republicans believe, they need to put meat on the bones and i was looking forward to this very much but it is leak saying to the children, you know what, let's take a pledge, every can have lollipops tor breakfast. there is nothing about serious issues we have discussed on the panel, how do you deal with the entitlement spending in this country. nothing there. it says, basically, let's not have the stimulus, we don't believe in the stusimulus or health care reform and let's allow the tax cuts to take place, but it doesn't say how
6:46 pm
we'll pay for the tax cuts and that is why you see president obama and speaker pelosi saying "back to the future." go back to the old republican agenda, there is nothing new here. >> chris: i must say you have led to me exactly the question i have been waiting to ask bill kristol, that you kept saying, they need to do something bold, they need to really get out front and need to take stuff stands and controversial stands and the country is ready for it. is it bold. >> it's a step on the way to boldness, seriously. a power-drunk, in inebriated, the democratic party is driving the ckacar off the cliff, the ft thing to do is put on the brakes, and go back to the levels of discretionary spending, and you pointed 0 that out, that is a cut -- >> nothing about earmarks. >> they cannot get republicans to agree to that and if republicans take the house, there will be such sentiment,
6:47 pm
with the tea party nation, do earmarks and they'll lay down the budget in 2011 as chairman of the budget committee to address entitlements and they are being bold in a reasonable way. >> there is a reason john boehner didn't want to say anything about entitlements, it is a politically perilous stance to take and this is a political document and we're looking at it as a governing documents and as a governing document it comes up short. they have to give the candidates something to run on and, when they say it is the matter of no, they can wave it in the air, it got negative push back from the tea party blogosphere shows you not that the republicans have anything to worry about, i don't think, before november, because the tea party is will inside the republican tents and pushing it forward but afterwards, afterwards if they don't govern in a way they are emboldened and grassroots wants them to, they
6:48 pm
hail have a lot of problems and i don't think we have ever seen a time when a parties that is the unpopular, and the republican party is still unpopular, poised to make big gains in congress, and there's a lot of warnings, in that. >> brit i want to ask you a version of what i asked bill because you would say... the country is focused and serious about debt in a way it has never been before and do you think the pledge to america is serious. >> it is serious, but it is just -- it isn't really serious -- look, the issue of the entitlement tsunami, of unfunded liabilities, which is staggering, and would bring the economy to its knees if we went on as we are this is great economic issue of our time. the recession will in the fullness of time, if effective will subside but it is sitting out there ready to land on us in a crushing way and the public is more attuned and aware of this than ever before and, younger
6:49 pm
people, you ask what they think they'll get out of social security and medicare they don't expect a dime and people are ready for this and people on social security are grandfathered in with benefits in any serious proposal that has been made and the republicans came up short here and may be behind the curve and the democrats are hopelessly out of step with the public but the republicans may be, too, to the extent it is night strong enough document, and i think the public would absorb and accept and get behind. >> chris: for all the hype about the pledge i'm not sure it was the most interesting political moment this week and for that i want to go back to the town hall meeting, cnbc town hall meeting with president obama where a woman, professional, who voted for barack obama two years ago, talked about her frustrations. let's watch: >> i have been told that i voted for a man who said she was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class and i'm
6:50 pm
one of those people and i'm waiting sir. i am waiting. i don't feel it yet. >> chris: juan, the president smiled but looked like he wanted to be anywhere in the world except on that stool, hearing from that woman. >> he had a moment. he could have responded with energy and now the white house theme has been the president is not isolated, he goes out, he hears these things. >> chris: and, he wished he was more isolated. >> what struck me, a black american woman, speaking from the heart, and she was no plant, the left wing said she was a plant and she's no plant and she supported president obama and wants him to succeed but is disappointed and that is legitimate and she's saying, stop asking other people to do your battles for you and the republicans dominate the narrative on the economy, even if the economy shows indication of getting better, they dominate on health care, even if most americans say, they wish -- passed the -- wish the health care package -- >> i don't think she said that,
6:51 pm
your policies are not affecting our lives and we'll end up eating franks and beans. >> she said, if things don't change as quickly as i hope, you are not telling us why things are getting better. >> wait, there are two things, number one, she has not felt enough change and that is true of almost, like the vast majority of voters and one thing that you can do, if there has not been enough change you can convince people like her that you are trying as hard as you can so that she will not be so frustrated with you. and that is what he failed to do for sher. >> chris: forgive me, i'm trying to -- it is results. >> you are trying -- black america, 90% of black america supports him. >> the problem in the election, obama didn't try hard enough to enact his agenda? the problem is, it was the wrong agenda. the public wanted something done about the economy. that was job one, job two, down to job ten and what he did was allow congress to enact a
6:52 pm
whopping stimulus bill, which was complete unfocused and promiscuous in its spending, and, that has manifestly failed, to end the recession which ended in june of '09 and, to get the unemployment rate down and having past the measure he moved onto the gigantic health care people which nobody in america -- which was nobody in america's priority and spent a year on that and -- >> can i say one thing, one thing congress didn't do, it did not cut people's taxes and did not -- stop the tax hikes going to infect on january 1st. that i think is a huge problem, and they have -- let me -- they have control of congress and control the presidency and knew taxes were due to go up. and they are sending their members home without fixing the tax problem. >> brit it reduced what would have been a 16% unemployment rate according to republicans -- >> thank you panel, we'll see you next week and, don't forget to check out this latest edition of panel plus where i promise the group will pick up right with this discussion at this
6:53 pm
moment, and we'll get response on our web site, foxnewssunday.com and we'll post the video before noon eastern time, up next, our power player of the week. panel plus where tl pick up this discussion at this moment.
6:54 pm
i was a bookkeeper for 34 years. when i went on medicare, i did the numbers. that was the moment of truth. medicare by itself doesn't cover everything. we'd need more than that. i don't want to spend my life worrying about what would happen if one of us got sick. [ male announcer ] now more than ever, you may be wondering:
6:55 pm
do i have the right medicare coverage? don't spend your life worrying. let the health plan experts at securehorizons, providers of aarp medicarecomplete, help you decide. a leader in medicare plans, securehorizons is a name you can depend on for coverage beyond original medicare. [ woman ] it's nice to get the care you need without always thinking about the money. i can just focus on the things i need. [ male announcer ] in these changing times, the name on your medicare health plan may be more important than ever. choose a company you can depend on. [ woman ] life's too short to worry about health care. i hate to worry. i like things i can depend on. [ male announcer ] don't spend life wondering about your medicare coverage. talk to securehorizons today to get the answers you need. call now.
6:56 pm
>> chris: most of the attention is focused on which party will control congress there are 37 other races that could be even more important and at the center of that action is our power player of the week. >> it surprises me how governors in this town are so overlooked. people are focused on the house and senate races and focused on the presidential race. >> nick has changed all that in four years in washington. 28-year-old political whiz kid is director of the republican governors, so. >> theotion is adopted. >> and for all the talk about the gop taking back congress, he has built the rga into the biggest political committee in
6:57 pm
town. >> it shows the american people that our party's ideas and principles actually work. we have to be doing that at the state level where government is closest to families where it can be felt the most. >> ayers pitch is that federal change starts at the state level not just in politics. governors will help determine redistricting nextyear and had play a key role in the presidential campaign. >> david axelrod will have a tough time if we have more than 30 republican governors which is our plan to do. >> at the end of june they had more than $40 million cash on hand. >> a million here. >> the republican national committee which has financial irregularities had less than $10 million. >> we don't want to run the rga like a political committee. we want a return on investment and make case to the donors this
6:58 pm
is the place to send your contributions because we're going to treat it like investment. >> last november, republicans won in new jersey and virginia. this fall, ayers is targeting swing states like wisconsin and florida hoping to boost the number of gop governors from the current 24. >> by at age ten, were you a staunch republican. >> ayers has always been in a hurry. back in 1992 he tried to persuade his mother not to vote for bill clinton. >> i always believed in individual responsibility. >> at age ten you thought that? >> yeah. i always worked summer jobs. i wanted to buy my own clothes, by own baseball cards. >> he quit college as a 19-year-old freshman to help sonny purchase due the first republican georgian. he plans to leave rga after
6:59 pm
november. he will be one of hottest republican contenders. has anybody approached you. >> we're focused on 2010. we're going to make a huge difference. the idea is that the rga put ourselves in position to impact who they are going to be deciding on election day is a wonderful opportunity. >> chris: as we said there are now 24 republican governors and ayers hopes to boost that to 30 but the record for the gop is 33 governors and you get the feeling that nick ayers has his eye on that. program note, next sunday we will be in the first sunday show of the fall campaign. rand paul and jack conway. that is it for today. have a great, and we'll see you next fo

114 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on